Skip to content
  • HOME
  • ABOUT US
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • FOUNDING MEMBERS
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • GOVERNING BODY
  • LRA INTERNSHIP PROGRAM IN LEGAL JOURNALISM
  • LRA-WOMEN
  • CONTENTS
  • EVENTS
  • CAMPUS AMBASSADOR
  • LRA LAW FIRM
  • IT DEPARTMENT
  • PRIVACY POLICY
  • Third National Blog writing competition
Legal Research And Analysis

Legal Research And Analysis

In these dark and despair moments, Legal Research & Analysis Stands undeterred for Ukraine people and it's Sovereignty. Love and Peace for Ukraine, Slava Ukraini!

  • HOME
  • ABOUT US
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • FOUNDING MEMBERS
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • GOVERNING BODY
  • LRA INTERNSHIP PROGRAM IN LEGAL JOURNALISM
  • LRA-WOMEN
    • LRAWOMEN Volunteers Program
  • CONTENTS
    • LRASJ
    • ARTICLES
    • Opinions & Special Articles
    • BLOG
    • JOURNAL
      • VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1
    • EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
    • LRA Current Affairs
    • LRA E ARCHIVES
    • Picture stories
  • EVENTS
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE IN RESEARCH WRITING
  • CAMPUS AMBASSADOR
  • LRA LAW FIRM
  • IT DEPARTMENT
  • PRIVACY POLICY
  • Third National Blog writing competition
  • Toggle search form

Category: Covering the Supreme Court of India

60 cases between husband, wife in 41 years; Wonders Supreme Court

Posted on April 7, 2022April 7, 2022 By Sankalp Mirani
60 cases between husband, wife in 41 years; Wonders Supreme Court

Chief Justice NV Ramana on Wednesday was surprised with a particular marital dispute case as the estranged couple has 60 cases against each other in a span of 41 years, including 11 years of separation.

Covering the Supreme Court of India

Restriction on remarriage after divorce will be applicable only if the other party files an appeal during the limitation period: Supreme Court

Posted on March 30, 2022April 5, 2022 By Sankalp Mirani
Restriction on remarriage after divorce will be applicable only if the other party files an appeal during the limitation period: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that in order to enforce the ban on remarriage after divorce, as specified under section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, it is not necessary that the other party before the High Court within the limitation period. Bring an appeal against the decree.

Covering the Supreme Court of India

Refusing to quash criminal proceedings, HC cannot issue directions for ‘no arrest’ or ‘no coercive action’ till final report is filed: Supreme Court reiterates

Posted on March 8, 2022April 6, 2022 By Sabina Nafees Nafees
Refusing to quash criminal proceedings, HC cannot issue directions for ‘no arrest’ or ‘no coercive action’ till final report is filed: Supreme Court reiterates

Refusing to quash criminal proceedings, HC cannot issue directions for ‘no arrest’ or ‘no coercive action’ till final report is filed: Supreme Court reiterates

The Supreme Court, while refusing to quash criminal proceedings, said the Supreme Court, while refusing to quash the criminal proceedings, cannot issue directions for “no arrest” or “no coercive action” till the final report is filed. A bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna observed that the Supreme Court rejected the practice of passing orders of “no arrest” or “no coercive action” when the petition to be dismissed was itself dismissed.

Covering the Supreme Court of India

173 CrPC – Magistrate should consider both preliminary final report and supplementary report before proceeding against accused: Supreme Court

Posted on March 3, 2022April 6, 2022 By Sabina Nafees Nafees
173 CrPC – Magistrate should consider both preliminary final report and supplementary report before proceeding against accused: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that whether there is a ground to believe that the accused has committed the offense, the preliminary final report submitted under section 173(2) of CrPC and section 173(8) before deciding to a judicial magistrate ) should consider the supplementary reports (both supplementary reports). A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant made the observation while considering a criminal appeal against the Kerala High Court’s order dated March 3, 2021.

Covering the Supreme Court of India

Denial of pension to ad hoc employee after 30 years of service is unfair: Supreme Court

Posted on February 25, 2022April 6, 2022 By Sabina Nafees Nafees
Denial of pension to ad hoc employee after 30 years of service is unfair: Supreme Court

A bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna was considering an SLP opposing the Gujarat High Court order directing the state to pay pensionary benefits to the respondent who is more than 30 years. Retired after rendering service. The Bench, while dismissing the SLP of the State, held that taking 30 years of continuous service and thereafter arguing that an employee who has rendered 30 years of continuous service would not be eligible for a pension, is nothing but unreasonable.

Covering the Supreme Court of India

Denying bail to the accused because the lawyer was unprepared would be a travesty of justice: Supreme Court

Posted on February 25, 2022April 6, 2022 By Sankalp Mirani
Denying bail to the accused because the lawyer was unprepared would be a travesty of justice: Supreme Court

Denying bail to accused because the lawyer was unprepared would be a travesty of justice: Supreme Court

Covering the Supreme Court of India

Section 138 NI Act – Prima Facie Indication That Complaint Is Filed By Authorized Person Of Company Sufficient For Magistrate To Take Cognisance: Supreme Court

Posted on February 23, 2022April 6, 2022 By Sankalp Mirani
Section 138 NI Act – Prima Facie Indication That Complaint Is Filed By Authorized Person Of Company Sufficient For Magistrate To Take Cognisance: Supreme Court

Proper authorization can be an issue for trial and complaints cannot be quashed on this ground under Section 482 CRPC, Court added. The Supreme Court observed that, in a cheque bounce case, when the complainant/payee is a company, an authorized employee can represent the company.

Covering the Supreme Court of India

Section 106, Evidence Act is not intended to absolve the prosecution from discharging its duty of conviction; Supreme Court.

Posted on February 19, 2022April 7, 2022 By Sankalp Mirani
Section 106,  Evidence Act is not intended to absolve the prosecution from discharging its duty of conviction;  Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, while acquitting the accused of murder, said that the object of section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act is not to absolve the prosecution from its duty to prove the guilt of the accused.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi observed that by invoking the provisions contained in Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the burden cannot be shifted on the accused when the prosecution could not prove the substantive facts as against the accused. was alleged. ,

Covering the Supreme Court of India, current affairs

Quick Search

Visit Our Store

Categories

RECENT POSTS

  • Article 370: The untold story
  • CHANGING TRENDS IN RULES OF
    CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION
  • Procedure for Release of building under the U.P. Urban Building Act 1972
  • Presumption under Section 29 POCSO Act does not discharge prosecution of duty to prove case: Bombay High Court; LEGAL UPDATES
  • Shaikh Ahmad Deedat- The Great Man

Empirical Research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsL2WcsDuRU

    Log in

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org

    Sign up

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org

    Copyright © 2022 Legal Research And Analysis.

    Powered by PressBook WordPress theme

    Terms and Conditions